An honest Calvinist view of Total Depravity.

[Whatever]

Do you believe one is saved as in regeneration, before they hear and believe the Gospel ?

No! But one is elect before they are born. God chooses the elect to be saved in the future.

To make the above more intelligent, Ephesians says we (Christians) were chosen before the foundation of the world. But we were still born in Adam and subject to the curse as covenant breakers. There is only one lump of humanity (Rom 9:21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?)

Then, at God's time of choosing each elect person hears the gospel and God's irresistible grace opens his heart (like Lydia in Acts 16:14) and he believes and then he is "delivered from the power of darkness, and transferred into the kingdom of his beloved son." (Colossians 1:13)

So, at a certain time in history each elect person is "delivered from" the power of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of Jesus.
Vincent's Word Studies says: A change of kingdoms is indicated.
Robertson's Word Pictures says: Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light.

So again, Calvinists do not believe one is saved before they hear the gospel. They may be predestined to be saved at a certain time and place when God enables them to accept the gospel, but they are not really saved until that translation from one kingdom to the other happens.

For Joe Blow who was born in June 6th 1990, that might not happen until February 15th, 2034 at 3:30 in the afternoon. But that event was foreordained to happen. But it doesn't happen before it actually happens.

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

No! But one is elect before they are born. God chooses the elect to be saved in the future.

So you believe a person is lost and unregenerate when they hear and believe the Gospel ?

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

So, at a certain time in history each elect person is "delivered from" the power of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of Jesus.

Agreed, but I call that regeneration which is an aspect of salvation that saves Titus 3:5-6

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

So again, Calvinists do not believe one is saved before they hear the gospel.

I do as described above, without that man is only natural and cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God 1 Cor 2:14

 

[GodsGrace]

No! But one is elect before they are born. God chooses the elect to be saved in the future.

To make the above more intelligent, Ephesians says we (Christians) were chosen before the foundation of the world. But we were still born in Adam and subject to the curse as covenant breakers. There is only one lump of humanity (Rom 9:21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?)

Then, at God's time of choosing each elect person hears the gospel and God's irresistible grace opens his heart (like Lydia in Acts 16:14) and he believes and then he is "delivered from the power of darkness, and transferred into the kingdom of his beloved son." (Colossians 1:13)

So, at a certain time in history each elect person is "delivered from" the power of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of Jesus.
Vincent's Word Studies says: A change of kingdoms is indicated.
Robertson's Word Pictures says: Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light.

So again, Calvinists do not believe one is saved before they hear the gospel. They may be predestined to be saved at a certain time and place when God enables them to accept the gospel, but they are not really saved until that translation from one kingdom to the other happens.

For Joe Blow who was born in June 6th 1990, that might not happen until February 15th, 2034 at 3:30 in the afternoon. But that event was foreordained to happen. But it doesn't happen before it actually happens.

Is it possible for Joe to die before Feb 15, 2034?

 

[brightfame52]

Is it possible for Joe to die before Feb 15, 2034?

No its not possible for that would defeat the Purpose of God and that cant happen. The person is preserved in Jesus Christ until called which is when they are converted Jude 1:1

Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

Jesus Christ guards their unregenerate lives until called

 

[JJonas]

I know you were talking to somebody else, but this is a fallacy. We believe and the Bible seems to teach that people are elect before they are even born. But the elect person is not saved the minute he comes into existence. The elect person is born a child of wrath just as the rest (Eph 2:3) and only becomes saved at the time and place God chooses to regenerate him. Kind of like Saul of Tarsus.

Rom. 8:30 confirms what you wrote: Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
I understand that the salvation and the justification of an elect happen at the same time. I don't see how salvation could be separated from justification!

And when God says "I will harden Pharaoh's heart" I don't think God actually did something to Pharaoh. All God has to do is loosen His restrain on the "principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph 6:12) and they will gladly do the job.

I believe you are right. It also makes sense with what you wrote about 2 Sa 24:1 and 1Ch 21:1.

What I found interesting, is that in both the cases that were mentioned where God hardened the heart of some people (Exodus 4:21 and John 12:39-40), this was to make way for the execution of an unavoidable judgement that was earlier prophesised:

Genesis 15:
13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

Deut. 32:21
They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.

This last judgment was fulfilled as most of Israel didn't obey the Gospel (because God hardened their heart), see Rom. 9:16-19.

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

And when God says "I will harden Pharaoh's heart" I don't think God actually did something to Pharaoh. All God has to do is loosen His restrain on the "principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph 6:12) and they will gladly do the job.

Hi, so you dont think God was active but passive when He said He will harden the heart of pharaoh ?

 

[JJonas]

Of course. A sinner doesn't need God to harden their heart for the person to harden their hearts themselves.

Even born again Christians can harden their hearts at times - not necessarily against God, but in everyday things. Especially harden their hearts against their spouse. That's why there is so much divorce.

I agree. The Bible has however for us, believers, some serious warnings in regards to hardening the heart that involve more than risking a failed mariage:

Heb 3:
12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

Although to make the point, the people used as an example are the people about whom God said that “they do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways”, the serious warning is addressed to us, “brethen”!

God in His wisdom saw it not fit to include the words of John Calvin or any other Calvinists or forethinker like Augustinus in the biblical canon. Moreover, those people didn't have the same authority as the prophets and the apostles. Yes, we cannot say that their words are inspired (litteraly: divinely breathed (theopneustos)) as it is said about the Scripture in 2 Tim 3:16! What are the implications? I believe that any interpretation of the truths that are in the Bible (like TULIP) can be true, or false, or more subtly: mostly true or mostly false. Therefore the Scripture has the final authority, so that, as God enlighten our understanding of the Scripture more and more, we need to check again and again any interpretation that we held dear to see if it still pass the test with Scripture.

To do the opposite is serious error, namely: harden our heart against Scripture that seem to threaten an interpretation that we held dear.

 

[JJonas]

To do the opposite is serious error, namely: harden our heart against Scripture that seem to threaten an interpretation that we held dear.

Thankfully, there are some good examples from Calvinists that didn't downplay such serious warnings, even if they seem to threaten the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, as we can find in the following article from Scott Hubbard:

Even Believers Need to Be Warned: How Hell Motivates Holiness

When Paul mentioned hell, he warned not only the lost, but believers. Why might that be, and should we be warning one another in the church today?

www.desiringgod.org

I quote:

“Dear brothers,” he [Paulus] would write in effect, “Christ is gloriously yours. But until you see him face to face, don’t imagine yourselves out of danger. Hell still awaits any who forsake him.”

The author also insists that this warning is for all of us, no matter how mature we are:

Finally, and maybe most surprising of all, Paul warned of hell not only to alarm the presumptuous and protect the vulnerable, but also to humble the mature. No matter how strong others seemed, Paul did not think they were too strong for danger, too firm to fall. He knew the most established believer stands just a few yards away from spiritual peril, and just a few more yards from spiritual ruin. So, he writes, “Do not become proud, but fear” (Romans 11:20).

He also quoted a certain Robert Murray M’Cheyne, which is apparently Calvinist too (https://www.mcheyne.info/keith-walker/), as he wrote to a friend and fellow minister:

I charge you, be clothed with humility, or you will yet be a wandering star, for which is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. . . . If you lead sinners to yourself, and not to Christ, Immanuel will cast the star out of His right hand into utter darkness.

Still the author wrote his article with a Calvinist perspective:

But if he is in Christ, then such a warning will have its God-intended effect in time. His initial offense or displeasure will give way to the dreadful realization that the house is on fire; he must escape.

And:

Why speak so to a fruitful, faithful, mature minister of Christ? Because M’Cheyne (and Paul before him) knew the paradoxical nature of Christian perseverance: We are never more in danger than when we think we are not. And we are never safer than when we feel our weakness, distrust our strength, and lean hard upon the arm of our Lord Jesus. “He that walketh humbly walketh safely,” John Owen writes (Works, 6:217). And he who remembers hell walks humbly.

My conclusion to the debate I have with you about Calvinism:

I find it problematic if people use their theology to cancel important Scripture like the warnings of Heb. 3. But if people like Scott Hubbard or Robert Murray M’Cheyne don't use their theology to cancel the Word of God, then I don't have much to say against their theology (here: Calvinism). This shows me that they agree that the Scripture has the highest authority, so that any difference I see between my theology and theirs shouldn't be a major issue. Yes, for this reason I believe that what they wrote, although with a Calvinist perspective, can be very profitable for a Non-Calvinist like me!

One more question: As Calvinists, do you agree with the message of the article I cited? Or do you believe that the author strayed away from the Calvinist doctrines?

 

[Whatever]

So you believe a person is lost and unregenerate when they hear and believe the Gospel ?

The person ( I will use myself as an example) is lost and unregenerate when they hear the gospel many times. But again, at the right time God opened my heart to accept and believe. I don't know if that original opening of my heart is regeneration or not. That is the orthodox Calvinist view.

But I have come to wonder if the Arminian idea of Prevenient grace might be the answer. The Arminians believed in Total depravity just as the Calvinists did. They came up with this idea of Prevenient grace as something that God gives to everybody that kind of unhardens the heart and makes it possible for a person to accept the gospel. To them, it only makes the person "saveable." So it is not irresistible or efficacious.

I don't have a problem if God gives only the elect this prevenient grace, and if it is irresistible and efficacious (capable of having the desired result or effect; effective as a means, measure, remedy, etc.). And then the full regeneration happens when you are translated into His Kingdom. But thinking about it, the time lapse

To do the opposite is serious error, namely: harden our heart against Scripture that seem to threaten an interpretation that we held dear.

And that is exactly what "free willers" seem to do. Calvinist understanding of Scripture threatens their dearly held worldview. Most non-Calvinists that dismiss Calvinism only do so because their friends, Pastor or parents have told them it is wrong. They do not take the time to really look into these things.

One guy who was an elder in a Arminian Church, I tried giving him a 5 points book, and he put his hands up and backed away like a vampire backing away from a cross. I think he was actually afraid it might challenge him.

One more question: As Calvinists, do you agree with the message of the article I cited? Or do you believe that the author strayed away from the Calvinist doctrines?

If you've ever read any of the older Calvinist Puritan stuff, you would know they stressed backsliding and such.

But you said something along the lines of causing one passage to contradict another passage - or something like that.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, . . . .

If you interpret the above as a born again person doing this, then I think John would contradict this.

1Jn 3:9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

I know the "does not" is in the tense that means a "continuous action" like "does not keep on continuing so sin," but it seems that would have to be exactly what the person in the Hebrews passage has to do.

Also from John
1Jn_5:4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith.
1Jn_5:5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Whoever is born of God does overcome the world and does not fall away.
If you insist the the Hebrews passage is talking about an actual born again person, we have a conflict.

I believe the Hebrews passage is talking about Jewish people who came to the Church and "believed" and "tasted" all the Spiritual things going on, but found out that all their Jewish friends has shunned them, they were no longer welcome in synagogue's and so forth and decided it was not worth all this "persecution" and wanted to go back to Judaism. Once they reject Jesus' perfect sacrifice and go back to the Jewish sacrifices, the writer is telling them they cannot do this "since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame."

 

[Whatever]

Hi, so you dont think God was active but passive when He said He will harden the heart of pharaoh ?

God's always active. God had to give permission to Satan or some spiritual power to do whatever he did to harden Pharaoh's heart.
Kind of like in 1 Kings 22

1Ki 22:19 Then Micaiah said, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 And the LORD said, 'Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?' So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, and said, 'I will persuade him.' 22 The LORD said to him, 'In what way?' So he said, 'I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' And the LORD said, 'You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.'

The word persuade there is:
paw-thaw'
A primitive root; to open, that is, be (causatively make) roomy; usually figuratively (in a mental or moral sense) to be (causatively make) simple or (in a sinister way) delude: - allure, deceive, enlarge, entice, flatter, persuade, silly (one).

Read verses 11 and 12 that come before 19 and see the stuff Ahab's prophets said to him. Those were apparently the things the lying spirit put in their mouths.

 

[JJonas]

And that is exactly what "free willers" seem to do.

I agree. I have seem often people using emotional or philosophical arguments (like: “it's not the God that I know!” or “God cannot be a capricious monster!”) to dismiss verses about election like: 9:13-23. They surely have to clean up their backyard first before attacking Calvinism!

If you've ever read any of the older Calvinist Puritan stuff, you would know they stressed backsliding and such.

Like the Pilgrim's Progress of John Bunyan, I guess. To this day however, I can't discern a Calvinist perspective in his book, but he was at least close to Calvinism. But I can understand what you were saying.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, . . . .

If you interpret the above as a born again person doing this, then I think John would contradict this.

1Jn 3:9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

I know the "does not" is in the tense that means a "continuous action" like "does not keep on continuing so sin," but it seems that would have to be exactly what the person in the Hebrews passage has to do.

Also from John
1Jn_5:4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith.
1Jn_5:5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Whoever is born of God does overcome the world and does not fall away.
If you insist the the Hebrews passage is talking about an actual born again person, we have a conflict.

There is also a big debate, if a born-again christian could lose his salvation! I have also heard many interpretations about Heb 6, all from people defending that salvation could not be lost.

What is then your understanding of 2 Peter 2? The people described were bought from the Lord: false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. To the best of my knowledge, when the Bible refers to people that were bought from the Lord, it is about believers, saved people.

I tend to believe, that new-born believers could lose their salvation, not when they deny Jesus out of weakness as Peter did (and later repented), but when they chose to reject Jesus with all their heart. Do you see also what kind of people 2 Peter 2 describes? It is the worst kind of people, having an exceptional devilish character! Apropos, it was said to Lucifer in Ez. 28:15: Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. It seems to me, that new-born believers in exceptional cases could follow the same path as Lucifer, which is, to act in a way that willfully reject the good nature they have (1 John 3:9) and fall away.

OTOH, 2 Peter 2:22 and Heb 6:7-8 clearly hint that such people were destined to fall by their own nature (bad earth, dog, pig). These verses can even question if they were really born again at the first place. Heb 6:7-8 can also be compared with the parable of the good seed that falls in 4 different places, with only the last one being called good.

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

The person ( I will use myself as an example) is lost and unregenerate when they hear the gospel many times. But again, at the right time God opened my heart to accept and believe.

But isnt at that time regeneration took place ? Doesnt regeneration effect the opening of the heart spiritually ?

Like lydia Acts 16:14

14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.

The opening of heart here is I believe the fruit of regeneration and because of that she was able to pay close attention with spiritual interest to the things of God

See the natural unregenerate man cant do that 1 Cor 2:14

If you werent regenerated when you accepted the gospel and believed it, then you did it as a unregenerate natural man. So please consider that.

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

God's always active.

So God was active in hardening Pharoahs already naturally hard heart. He wasn't passive at all. It was specific commands God hardened his heart in regard to.

 

[Whatever]

If you werent regenerated when you accepted the gospel and believed it, then you did it as a unregenerate natural man. So please consider that.

I wasn't saying I was unregenerate when I accepted and believed the gospel. Paul says the natural man regards the things of the Spirit foolishness. That word seems to mean silly or absurd and that they are spiritually discerned.

I think it is putting God in a box to say that God can't give somebody some degree of spiritual understanding without having to completely regenerate them. The natural man (by himself) cannot accept the things of the Spirit of God, but why cannot the Omnipotent God simply give that natural man just enough understanding to understand and then accept? Especially since that person was chosen to be saved before hand.

This is exactly what the Arminians thought, except they believed that God did this to everyone. They called it Prevenient grace. The word"prevenient," considered an archaic term today, was common in the King James English and simply means to "go before" or "precede."

So I am taking something from both Calvinism and Arminianism.

For those not familiar with Arminianism:

https://www.theopedia.com/arminianism

So God was active in hardening Pharoahs already naturally hard heart. He wasn't passive at all. It was specific commands God hardened his heart in regard to.

Why do you guys insist that everything has to be explained to the minutest detail?

 

[Whatever]

But isnt at that time regeneration took place ? Doesnt regeneration effect the opening of the heart spiritually ?
Like lydia Acts 16:14

Again, I don't know.
Luk 24:36 Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, "Peace to you."

These guys were disciples, so we would assume they were already born again.
Luk 24:45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

The word "opened" is the same word used for Lydia. I know one says "heart" and this one says "understanding."
The word "heart" in the Lydia passage is Kardia where we get our word cardiologist from, but Strongs says it's meaning is: the heart, that is, (figuratively) the thoughts or feelings (mind) . . .

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

I wasn't saying I was unregenerate when I accepted and believed the gospel.

So either you were saved by regeneration before you believed Titus 3:5

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Or you were lost, unregenerate when you believed, which is it please ? No in-between

 

[brightfame52]

Whatever

I think it is putting God in a box to say that God can't give somebody some degree of spiritual understanding without having to completely regenerate them

Thats not scriptural, one is either Spiritual or natural/flesh. A natural fleshly man with Spiritual understanding, you just contradicted Paul, because spiritual things need to be spiritually discerned, thats why He gives Spirit for regenration 1 Cor 2:12-14

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[brightfame52]

Again, I don't know.
Luk 24:36 Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, "Peace to you."

These guys were disciples, so we would assume they were already born again.
Luk 24:45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

The word "opened" is the same word used for Lydia. I know one says "heart" and this one says "understanding."
The word "heart" in the Lydia passage is Kardia where we get our word cardiologist from, but Strongs says it's meaning is: the heart, that is, (figuratively) the thoughts or feelings (mind) . . .

I believe Lydia was regenerated so she could spiritually hear and attend to the words of life. Man naturally cant and wont do that.

I believe they were already born again, doesnt mean once you are born again you all the sudden have all understanding.

Paul writing to I believe born again believers wrote Eph 1:16-19

16 I Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;

17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,

 

[Whatever]

What is then your understanding of 2 Peter 2? The people described were bought from the Lord: false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. To the best of my knowledge, when the Bible refers to people that were bought from the Lord, it is about believers, saved people.

Well, Peter does say they are false teachers. "denying the Lord who bought them" I can see this meaning that they claim to be Christian teachers, so they would be claiming they were bought by the Lord, but they are actually denying him by their lives.

I think the verse below pertains to them.

Tit 1:16 They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.

But yet:
1Co 9:27 But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.

2Co 13:5 Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

I'm getting tired and need to sign off. Maybe somebody could find out what test or examination Paul is talking about.